BEOWULF is indeed a work of Legend! - So Says Harry!

There are some weeks as a film fan where I genuinely feel blessed. This week was one of those. It started off this Monday with a screening of BEOWULF in 3D, then came THE MIST and then finally this morning with a digital screening of the final fondling of BLADE RUNNER.
Now I know BEOWULF’s characters have looked less than life like – and the overall look isn’t quite the FRANK FRAZETTA painting that we had hoped for, but here’s the secret of this film.
It seems nobody in advance of production thought to look at the film from the stand point of which sequence to get ready first to get folks the absolute most excited for the film. What was shown at Comic Con was ill-conceived as a clip. The “Austin Powers” Beowulf with Grendel’s arm – a truncated battle scene and Angelina Jolie appearing are not the moments that you come away with at the end of the final product.
What strikes me is this… In the entire history of American Animated/Mimed/Puppeted films… we’ve never seen an adult story told. And in this case, we’re literally dealing with one of the greatest stories, myths or legends ever told – re-interpretated by the co-quills of Neil Gaiman and Roger Avary.
Let me start at the beginning. When the film starts – I was distracted by the look of the movie… for about 5 minutes. Then, suddenly… as the tormented Grendel begins to be pained by the noisy humans… the loud, inconsiderate, drunk, fornicating braggarts of Denmark… It pains poor Grendel… and he communicates this physically, not in dialogue… and the result is filled with pathos. He’s a tumored, diseased demon creature… some horrid half-breed of man and the supernatural. He turned out twisted and sad… anything, but magnificent – and the pain that human kind causes him in his cave… far far away could not be conceived by those in the valley below.
Also in this opening sequence, we see the disdain that Robin Wright Penn’s youthful Wealthow feels for her drunken, belching, would be nudist king of a husband, Hrothgar (Sir Anthony Hopkins.) There is something she knows that repulses her from touching or loving her regal husband. It isn’t his age, it’s something in his past. Something that keeps him more mead than water. Drinking to oblivion.
Also in this opening we’re given an introduction to John Malkovich’s advisor to the king, Unferth – far from the lackluster villain that Moriarty made out, Malkovich’s Unferth is no villain. With his King, he is shown to feel the King is not really fit for rule. Watching out for him, seeking to do what his King can not or will not… which is of course overstepping his boundaries as advisor to Hrothgar.
The first attack from Grendel is furious – limbs flying, blood gushing… any that whimper, cry, scream or attack are torn asunder. Your only protection is to be still, silent and unobserved. Malkovich’s Unferth shows his wise cowardice and Hopkins’ Hrothgar reveals his bravery… and shame with his stand down of this creature.
The great Mead Hall is condemned and a decree by the King to bestow wealth, fame and more upon a Hero abroad is what brings Beowulf and his men. Through a torrential storm they row, seeking not the king’s gold, but the legendary status, the glory of spectacular victory. Beowulf is not a normal man, but not exactly a hero yet. He sails through this maelstrom for immortality through song and legend. And his men would fight by his side unto death.
It is with Beowulf and his right hand man, Wiglaf that the film begins to soar. I think this is for a couple of reasons. I think it helps in the film that Beowulf and Wiglaf look nothing like Ray Winstone and Brendan Gleeson. They’re invisible behind their computer generated forms. And in the future, I feel Zemeckis and all others that attempt to use Motion Capture to tell a tale – that they would do well to steer away from attempting to recreate a photo-real interpretation of a famous living actor or actress. It serves only to remind us that we are not seeing that subtlety and life of a beloved performer. Constantly reminding us that they are not really onscreen. This doesn’t ruin the film, but is a distraction that Beowulf and Wiglaf do not have.
I never liked BEOWULF in the posters or the trailers. His character seemed to be screaming constantly… trying to be an inhuman reminder of King Leonidas – but instead of the word SPARTA it was BEOWULF. Well… in the whole film – he never once strikes me this way. He’s a character of legend. Born a foot and a half taller than all other men. He’s a man of legend… chiseled like a hero should. His character is big and bold – boisterous and adept at Tall Tales regarding his own exploits. We also see that he has a weakness for the unusual…
His initial quarrels with Unferth are classic, the exchanged snips and snaps are sharp, witty and fast. His tale of why he lost a race is classic – and the visualization of this is pure tall tale work. The result is one of those feelings where we see his ambition, the disbelief of those around him and the quiet understanding and weariness of his men… who have heard variations upon the tale at various levels of grandeur.
Until Beowulf’s fight with Grendel – we are very much in the same position as Unferth. We see Beowulf as a possibly self-deluded egotist with designs on the King’s child bride. There is much to doubt in this Prince from across the sea. And when he disrobes before the queen to fight Grendel as he comes – naked and unarmed – it feels like a line, not a noble gesture…. Until Grendel comes.
When Grendel lays into the hall and into Beowulf’s men – we see that Beowulf is not just a braggart, but that he uses his men to test the foe before him. He watches and waits to spot a weakness. He gets his ass handed to him a couple of times, but eventually he finds Grendel’s flaw and strikes. You don’t feel like cheering him on, Grendel is a monster, but a malformed one. A diseased wretch needing to be plucked from his further suffering, and when he tears Grendel’s arm from his body – and the wounded Grendel makes his way back to his mother – living long enough to speak the name of his murderer to his mother… You do not cheer, you may even whimper.
Thus begins the real tale. The tale of Beowulf’s shame, the falsehood of his heroic life. How he, like Hrothgar before him, has a secret shame. Watching the people worship him, wishing him well- He’s fighting to add to his legend, while knowing his story is only a lie. That he is a hero to all, but himself.
Now he’s old, scarred, yet strong. A man of legend, but who knows the truth behind it all. The cursed agreement with a demon Harlot… himself a whore to magic and the witch. Trading his services for false honor and ill-gotten glory.
Until one day, a symbol of that deal returns to him… telling him, his time given is coming to an end – and that if he is ever to be free of the witch, if he’s ever to be worthy of legend, he must again return to the fray. To be the legend that dwarfs reenact on his anniversary of shame. To at last be the KING, the LEADER and the HERO of man against the creatures that cause men to shudder and be weak.
It is at this point where the movie is legend. It’s no longer a film of technique, you don’t think of actors with balls glued all over them. Instead at this point – the film has become a tale told again and again for over 13 centuries. It is here, where it is time to witness legend unleashed, heroism, sacrifice and the sort of greatness we are blessed to see envisioned from the imagination of the Dark Ages and trumpeted upon the whiz-bangery of 3D High Tech 21st century spectacle.
I saw this in a room with 5 others and couldn’t help cheering the old King on as he fought once again. There was a tad of EXCALIBUR magic to this film. It wasn’t Frazetta, it was like a Hildebrandt dream brought to motion – filled with sound and fury. A desperate, hopeless and painful leap from the age of magic, sorcery, demons and legend – as the world was stumbling forward to the age of enlightenment…. Here we had our last desperate mythological hero battling the last sired creature from the depths of our ID and I loved it.
I have to give it to Zemeckis, Avary and Gaiman – they pulled it off. None of us that watched this screening thought we’d be cheering or trumpeting this. When I read Moriarty’s review – I was worried that he’d taken some devil’s weed into those boisterous lungs of his – and his judgment was hampered…
Instead, I can say he’s just insane, in regards to Malkovich’s character. Who has a fascinating arc… going from disbeliever to being the first to swallow the Kool-Aid. He goes from believing in nothing, to believing in Beowulf, to being a believer in Christ. A true believer, whose beliefs are shaken, but not crushed.
The 3D is spectacular, but is overtaken by the story itself. I ceased to be concerned with the dimensional beauty – and was taken by the story and the characters. And with a movie that’s spending over a million a minute – for the story to shine above all is something I think we could all wish for more often.
On another note… in the history of Man versus Dragons – you’ve never ever seen anything even approaching how fucking awesome this scene is. It’s truly jaw-dropping and awe-inspiring.
Alan Silvestri’s score is pitch perfect and all the work by all the digital artist continued to create a legendary place for our imaginations to play. And Doug Chiang? BRAV-fucking-O!!! Great Dragon!!!
See this any way you can, but if you can see it in 3D… be it IMAX, REAL D or DOLBY 3D… get to it. I saw it in mere REAL D and it left my dick in the dirt.

I was hoping for good things from this movei but honestly wasn't expecting much. Now both Harry and Mori are hailing it. I hope you guys are right...you both have got me totally jonesing to see this now.

...is exactly like Harry's. I saw an advanced screening over at Paramount, and my brain was blown out of its cup holder! Yes, the rendering quality of the movie is excellent, yes the 3D effect is breath taking. Don't get me started on the action. Just go see it!!! (and, see it in 3D & Dolby if at all possible!!!!)

Nope, noit at all. In fact the characters look FAR better in the movie than they do in ANY of the movie posters I have seen. And, above that is the movie looks FAR better period in 3D (compared to what you would see in a normal trailer) Basically, these are the best rendered film characters you will have seen since Final Fantasy. (IMHO)

I would quite simply rather see something of more substance than I believe this will give me. I will say though I really like this review. Given the headline I really thought Harry would just blow his wad all over it but it seems to be pretty level headed explaining why, for Harry it's failings don't overcome its successes. I also gleamed enough that I think the opposite might just barely be true for myself. I'm not sure I can live with the shortcomings that I've been reading about so gingerly. I second Harry's suggestion to not make the characters in future mo-capped films look like their human counterparts as I think from the beginning that is really the problem we've had with this thing. Why animate something just to make it a direct avatar of something in life? It's pointless. All in all it seems like an ok time at the theater that will be forgotten in the maelstrom of some powerhouse films that are coming out this season.

There is no worse experience for a reader than to struggle through the prose of someone who thinks he is writing beautifully. Half of this review is incomprehensible. The other half isn't worth the effort.</p>
<p>Harry, I give up on you. Your unintelligible scribblings are an embarrassment.

I saw this in London in 3-D IMAX at the biggest screen in Europe. I've seen quite a few of the short films in this format and the effect is always overwhelming at first. So the screening had plenty of gasps and giggles from the audience, mostly new to 3-D IMAX. Then, after a short while, everyone began to notice that the film was pretty damn excellent. A lot of us ended up in the nearest pub afterwards and the general concensus was that the film would play ok in 2-d, but why would you bother to see it at anything less than it's big format, dimensional best.
Oh, and the dragon really is good, but Dragonslayer is still the best in that department.

the rest of you haters are still cunts. Do you guys anticipate anything? I mean not a movie comes along thats not griped about. Hate something you KNOW is bad i.e. Jan DeBont or Micheal Bay, and even then you really should judge film to film AFTER you see it.

I was worried about this one, I didn't want a lot of nonsense with that Tomb Raider chick taking up all the screen time. Seems like it might be pretty good though.
Beowulf Cartoon on Mock Hollywood today:
http://www.mockhollywood.com"

Which is cool. . .sure he writes some really purple prose, and yes, he gets carried away by some movies moreso than the rest of us (like the horrific Transformers), but it's absolutely forgivable to love movies that much. Passion never sucks. Thanks for the review Harry.

we can see some decent adaptations of great Celtic myths. How about a Brian Boru, Cuchulain or Finn MacCool movie? Have someone write a screenplay based on one of Morgan Llewellyn's novels, like Lion of Ireland, Red Branch, Bard or Finn MacCool. It could be epic and romantic and intense. No need to worry about casting larger than life actors (usually wrestlers who can't act) when it's mocap.

as much as I hate the trailers and how shit I think it looks in the trailers. This movie is picking up some serious buzz. It may after all be another zemeckis classic.

Nov. 10, 2007, 4:23 p.m. CST

by Moley Mole

"Final Fantasy...The characters looked like sex-dolls" Lol, a little yeah. IMHO, one aspect of that has to do with getting the eyes "right". The characters' eyes in Beowolf behave quite well. (not 100% perfect, but damn well) Btw, I also didn't think too much of this movie when the (2D) trailer came out, yet me seeing the movie in 3D, I believe, made a HUGE difference in the "wow" factor of my movie opinion. I believe there could be a sizable riff in the opinions of viewers whom see this movie in 2D vs. 3D. (Meaning, seeing it in 3D/Dolby, will probably help you LOVE the hell outta it. - Hey, its an action movie) Yeah, I believe this was a PG-13 version I saw (at Paramount Studios) as nudity was concealed (sometimes laughinly so, in the case of Beowolf's penis - you'll see what I mean) But, at the very least, there will be a rated R release onto DVD. (but yup, I would have liked to have seen the R version on the big screen, but big f-ing deal, it was still a cool-ass, entertaining movie).

The only thing that gets me about all these Beowulf movies is that they are “re-imaginings” of the story. Why not just play it straight? Oh well; nobody reads anymore anyway. I’ll probably rent this one too just to find out if they have Beowulf and Grendel screw the same woman like in the Gunnarsson version from two years ago.
Just bring on Iron Man.

Seriously, I am so fucking excited for this to come out next Friday that it gives me an erection just to think of it. And yet I can't convince anyone to go with me. Why oh why are you all so convinced that it won't be good? It just boggles the mind. Everyone who sees it loves it. It's written by Neil "Sandman and fucking American Gods" Gaiman, who, by the way, GreyGeek, I am absolutely certain has read the poem, although I'm only looking at the topics and not the posts and maybe you're being sarcastic. Honestly, I assume that most of you guys wake up, head to AICN, and then amuse yourselves for hours by seeing how many negative talkbacks you can make before dinner.

I couldn't make it past this line without commenting. My comment would consist of http://tinyurl.com/23go39 and the obeservation that Winsor McKay, the father of modern animation and director of the short on the other end of that link, died decades before Robert Zemeckis was even born.

Not sure how you reckon it's the first adult animation? but Struggled through most of that review til the last few paragraphs where you say they pulled it off so I'm glad! I was worried it all looked too plastic and shouty.<P>What's Real D and Dolby 3D? thought I was either gonna have to catch it in IMAX 3D or not at all!

Harry, you really piss all over your own credibility when you go off on other reviewers instead of just reviewing it yourself. And it's particularly silly in a case like this where moriarity mostly agrees with you. How are we supposed to take any of your reviews seriously when you're so inclined to give into childishness like that? Sory, I'm going to take Mori's word on this one, you come off as a sycophant on this one, a fanboy who can't help but lash out at anyone who doesn't find it as perfect and godlike as you.

did they make it to be the "UBER CARTOON" or is it supposed to simply replace live actors like some sick experiment in future movie making?
In either case, I still think the animation doesn't look that good and the trailer is just not getting me excited about this filth at all. Sorry Harry, I'm gonna be waiting for this one on DVD.

300 sucked. this looks pretty sucky as well and since the trailer tries to reel in the 300 crowd it makes it even lamer. i look at this book i have called the illustrated star wars universe i got back in 95ish, art mostly by ralph mcQ and its amazing, like an alternate universe to lucas's films, but deffinately what he wanted to make, it even has stuff never used, you can see how he really wanted to make those movies if he had the time, if only he had the man-power and money to build huge sets and models and take years and years to complete them, setting up each shot perfectly, directing each actor with patience and tediousness, but alas it makes me realize we don't live in a perfect world where your imagination can be visualized and then put up there on the screen exactly as you percieved it, time won't let you do that, it ages actors and money is a big influence, it shortens patience of film executives and, along with the audiences, makes you rush your product and eventually you settle for something less than what you wanted, lucas was very disapointed that the original star wars wasn't his vision, but what came out still was very awesome, but what it should have been wouldve blown our minds (even more so). it worked well on paper and in imagination, it could of been done by animation, but in the live action world it just wasn't possible. nowadays we have developed computer graphic imaging and have come to a point that we can make some things look totally believably real, yet this trailer looks like shit and i say, this time around they should take a different route and sit on their technology for 10 more years at least before wasting their breath and talent on these stories, these movies that will be with us for the rest of our lives and the lives of our kids and their kids possibly, and eventually be able to tell the stories that young george lucas wanted to back in 70's. i'm just saying that once again they're wasting some great peice of mythology and turning it into a visual freak fest with technology that does not live up to as great as they boast it is.

if i were- and i would- try to review a movie...i would try and make it something special...a plethora of pathos in it- but the last thing you'd come away remembering from it is many different things...not the pain and pathos, but yet at the same time the legendary quality of the review...that's not to say it isn't...and then the things ends and-if you were paying attention-are left with great impressions.

Was that a movie review or a rambling incoherent scene by scene synopsis? I wouldn't know because I only got a few paragraphs in.
<p>
And this..."In the entire history of American Animated/Mimed/Puppeted films… we’ve never seen an adult story told."...are you fucking kidding me? C'mon Harry. Even the Fox and the Hound was an adult story.
<p>
Heavy Metal, A Scanner Darkly, Waking Life, the Lord of the Rings series Bakshi did, Fantasia, Team America, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, The Labyrinth, Killer Klowns from Outer Space, Tromeo and Juliet, King Kong, Clash of the Titans, Mighty Joe Young...all of these are adult stories, aren't they? And if you don't consider them "adult stories", they all contain adult themes.
<p>
What in the hell does "adult story" mean anyways. This shit is ridiculous.

Not one reviewer here has mentioned that yet. The Santa Train creeped the fuck out of me with all of those dead eyes the kids had. I still see them in my nightmares and wake screaming, covered with sweat. The trailer for Beowulf looked like they were repeating with this trend. Can anyone answer me on this? Harry? Mori? Anyone?

I hate to sound like an a-hole but I must admit that Moley Mole sounds very plant-ish to me. I've always suspected the Studios to "plant" plants or disinformation in major movie talkbacks and if they did they'd probably sound like Moley Mole. BTW the trailer looked like shit and my city's got no 3-D cinemas so no-go for me. Plus they pussied out and made this FF:Spirits Within copy PG-13? Garbage. Double-Plus I like Gaiman but dislike Avary more.

p-wii, what makes me want to see Beowulf is Robert Zemeckis directing Ray Winstone, Anthony Hopkins, John Malkovich, Robin Wright Penn, Brendan Gleeson, Crispin Glover and nude CGI Angelina Jolie from a screenplay written by Neil Gaiman and with the music of Alan Silvestri.<br>
<br>
I'd say that's worth about two hours of my time.

Was not just for kids, that movie ruled. If you grew up with the show it fit perfectly, it wasn't raped to shit like Transformers. And unlike Transformers they let you enjoy most of the special effects. Kevin Smith has beaten out Transformers twice with his lame cameos. One for being in TMNT the better 80's cartoon movie, and again for being in Die Hard Three the better Summer Action movie and having a more bad ass Semi scene in it. Beowulf looks awesome, and it would be nice if it rocks in IMAX, the only cool thing I've seen in IMAX was the first Superman scene with the Jumbo Jet. Hopefully this movie finally prooves IMAX's worth. Also all you people saying OHHH there are too many movies out right now, what you are you going to see? This weekend? Fred Clause for the 3rd time? Bee movie? American Gangster? Or the stupid sounding Rainman movie?

I think the previews look gay and all, but I still think it's worth a watch. I didn't think so many people would be going crazy about how shitty it looks and will be, especially with quite a few good reviews. Seems like a lot of people are dying for this to fail. Which, I think it will. It might be good, but the advertising has been terrible. The whole "I AM BEOWULF!", thing in the trailer is so fucking cheesy, I want to jam a screwdriver in my ear. There's no way I'm going to see this in a theater, as everyone I know thinks its a kids movie and my girlfriend thinks it just looks queer. I'll rent it though.

Thanks Harry... I really couldn't figure out why so many people hated the "way" I reveiwed this film. But I really appreciate your review (especially addressing the Malkovich thing). He is SUPERB in this film. <p> Everything about this film is superb. <p> I predicted reviewers would love this film, and they have (so far Variety, Hollywood Reporter, Boston Herald, and Newsweek)... Now I predict that SILVESTRI will get an oscar nod for this delectable score! <p> P.S. - LOLOLOLOLOL! : )

Ever heard of that expression? It's when animation is too close to reality to be cartoony, but not quite real enough to be live action, so a part of your brain never relaxes enough to completely accept what you're seeing and is "waiting for it to fail". Like those moments when the eyes look dead, or the character's expressions don't quite match the voice, and you're taken out of the movie. Final Fantasy is a classic example of that, as was The Polar Express. A part of you is constantly saying "hey, that's pretty realistic" instead of getting absorbed in the story.

No animated, puppeted, etc. films with adult stories? Hmmmm....Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Team America: World Police, and others seemed to have a plot line that children wouldn't understand fully. Those are adult plots Harry.

giving the trailer to some intern in marketing is like advertising DisneyWorld by having a dude standing outside the front gate holding a cardboard sign. Remember that the trailer is designed to get Average Joe American into the theatre, which means making the film look as boombastic as possible. I doubt the intern got anywhere near the trailer, anything this important would be handled by the janitor.

But yeah, I'm guessing perhaps if I were to see it on a big screen it might look cool, but watching the commercials the animation looks like ass. And it doesn't matter who edited together the tv spot, it still doesn't change the quality of the animation in it.

i think all reviewers should have to wait a fews days after seeing a movie to write their review. This would take off some of the giddiness and overly excited aspect and give a more down to earth opinion.

Bulemia and spanking acted out with Barbie dolls. Not for the kiddies. Well, maybe tween fat girls with growing anxiety over their portly appearances. But that's totally up to the overbearing parents to decide.

PG-Thirtween? Hmmm. I still will see this, but I'm now wondering about the "balls-to-the-walls" Beowulf movie this was supposed to be. Blood! Gore! Hacking! Slashing! Nudity! PG-13! Huh?!?<p> I guess you have to be there. So I will be.

I've been hearing the 3D is fantastic so does that mean this might be the new norm in ten years. It'll make sense just because you really can't duplicate this kind of experience at home. I guess Avatar will be the ultimate test. Question: Does the new 3D look blurry without the glasses like old school 3D or did they find a new way to make it happen?

All you need to know is that the movie itself is terrific and well worth seeing on its own. In 3D this is nothing short of the most amazing experience i've had at the cinema in a long time. You'll all understand why it was done in motion capture when you see it. I walked out already planning a return to see it again. Really kicked my ass

nice movie indeed, but some parts of the story a wrong, thats sad. had nothing to do with the original "song" of beowulf....Robert Zemeckis did not a good job. I think, the story should be told like the original story from the german mythologie

I saw this yesterday and Harry right on all counts - its masterpiece made for adults. My The story really does make you forget the amazing effects, but the effects really are so spectacular that you should do your best to see this gem in 3D. The last act of heroics had cheering and spilling my popcorn - hell i even shed a tear for sorry king having one last chance to do put things right...

saw it online last nite, yes it was online last nite ....lol.....anyways the animation looked awesome, i mean u can tell it was animation but it was super realistic....not final fantasy animation or cut scene animation as some have said....anyone that compares this to a video game cut scene and says the video game is better did not see the movie and barely watched the trailers and promos.....if ur brain did not tell u this IS animation of a sort u would swear that the super hot angelina jolie was coming out of the water fully naked and wet just for u....looked that real, not anime boob, but real sexy,wanna breast feed again tits...that good.....i know we all love angelina, but the story wasnt all about her naked body, but beowulfs journey....and it rocked...i had low expectations for this movie and i was blown away....seriously worth checking out in the theatre, which i will prob do this weekend....and again, i say this alot when i do post, would all u asses that whine and whine about a movie being a pg-13 as opposed to an R get over it....not every movie can be R rated..u prob wish u could get an R rated version of the lion king...please.....when u see angelina jolies digitally renderedd body u will momentarily think its a XXX film.....i almost did....all people on the fence about this movie, dont think, just go, then form an opinion...it really is a great movie..

Can someone tell me why 3D is back on the upswing? Wasn't this tried before and failed horribly? Granted, the new technology has lifted it FAR beyond the Red n' Blue specs, but hoenstly, I'm already sick of it . . . the gimmicky "LOOK!! SOMETHIN'S COMIN AT YOU!!" shots, the ghosting images on the sides of the screen, and the WORST glasses ever . . . my nose was still feeling pinched an hour after the show was done. Movie . . . I thought was decent . . . looked pretty, awesome action sequences, but it was definitely blah for me everywhere else . . . and the effects were the same way . . . you can really tell the shots that time was spent on, and on others, it was almost bad. There was no reason to put this in 3D at all, and I stil don't understand why people are saying it's the wave of the future (again) for film . . . it will die just like last time.

The whole twist about Grendel's mother and Beowulf's connect to the Dragon is not in the original story. Frankly, it was real cool here and made what I think was not a very cinematic story into something stronger. Boewulf fought a dragon as an old man and it didn't end well for him, but the "shame" of both him and Hrothgar was at most a suggested undertone and not an actual union with the devil. Of course it wouldn't surprise me if college professors have suggested this reading of the story in more recent years. I would really love it if they use this technology to make Wagner's Ring Cycle. I suppose it won't happen with Zemeckis though, since he's probably had his fill of Norse myth and legend now.

Has anyone seen good vidcaps of Angelina in this movie? I keep hearing how hot she looks and how she won't let her (many) kids see it, but haven't seen the goods. I must have at least one full-bodied hot image of her from Beowulf before I go.

If anyone is on the fence about seeing this in the theater or waiting to watch on DVD/download, then definitely go see it in the theater in 3D.
I saw it at an IMAX 3D theater and it was amazing visually.
Sure there were a couple gimmicky "It's coming right at you!" moments with arrows/spears but the greatest parts of the 3D was just the overall depth it gave everything. It just looks really cool.
Like watching football on a regular TV and then seeing it on a hi-def feed for the first time.
I'm not sure what happened but the theater version in 3D is WAY better looking then the trailers.
Story was good too.
Amazing visuals, good story...definitly worth the extra cash to see it in 3D vs. renting the DVD

The Movie: 7.5/10<br>
Real D: 11/10<br><br>I've been a fan of 3D movies for a long time. How can that guy a few posts above not realize how different this technology is?<br><br>There is depth in front of the screen, 'on' the screen, and behind the screen. It feels as if you're standing in a room with these people!<br><br>My only criticisms: you lose a tiny bit of saturation and brightness (maybe 10%), and it seems that in longer shots either they stopped rendering depth after a certain distance, or the technology limits them from doing so. For Example: in one scene in front of snowy mountains, it looks as though you're watching a stage play, with incredible 100% perfect depth on the stage, and a canvas painting of mountains in the distance.<br><br>Still, that's a minor gripe, as this is 1000 times better than the "2.5D" treatment of Superman Returns (aka 'Viewmaster').<br><br>The revolution is not only in the technology, but in its accessibility, with thousands of screens across the country already capable of screening this format. Bring on Avatar!

I saw the movie today and have to say that the cg artists captured about about 80 percent of the real life actors appearance. The only flaws appeared to be that we lack a Rembrandt of our times and the software to bring that extra 20 percent onto the screen. By having real actors on the screen future artists can now try to push the cg envelope further. It's like comparing Vermeer to Rembrandt, both are Dutch but nobody has had more natural talent the Rembrandt. The use of real actors is a good thing, it acts as a sort of benchmark for cg artist.
Jon

You (the movie) are no Beowulf. It should be called the screaming Beowulf anyway. That is all he seems to do in this movie. The first 1/3 of the film is fairly faithful to the poem. Upon the encounter with Grendel's mother the movie becomes something different than any Old English epic I have ever read. Ironically, they made it more Christian than the original source. By the end they have turned an elegiac poem into a tragic one. By the way Jolie is indeed something to look at, but since her beautiful body is featureless, it is like looking at a naked Barbie doll in the movie. Wes thu hal!

Some of the animation (the dragon and Grendel in particular) was really good. The 3-D was very cool in parts, but a lot of it felt gimmicky as well. I thought the rendering of the human characters was very hit-or-miss. Close-ups were often very nice, but the movement was awful and often took me out of the movie. That brings me to the plot and dialogue. Oh, my goodness. I know this is a spectacle film and to nit-pick over the story and talking can be pointless. But, in parts it was so bad I just couldn't believe what I was seeing. And poor, poor John Malkovich has completely dissolved in an endless bog of self-parody. Overall, worth a shot for the 3-D , though the best 3-D of the night was in the trailer for the Neil Gaiman thing. If you don't have a 3-D screen in your area, really don't bother. And, creepy dead eyes.

It was decent. I am not a movie critic by any means (meaning I don't get paid for my opinions), but that is all I can say about it. Decent. 3 out of 5. The 3D effect was excellent, and the only way to see the film, because without the 3D it is just 2 hours of a Final Fantasy Game that you can't control.
!!--<SPOILERS AHEAD>--!!
Maybe it was the crowd in the theater I saw it in, but the giggles on every nude scene (or strategic placement in spite of one) pulls the viewer right out of their suspension. I seriously forgot that I was watching animation after 10 minutes, but then comes an animated ass and it krunks everything up. Then you compose yourself, and get eye-f*cked by all the visuals, and what happens? They throw an animated Angelina Jolie at you. Not a good thing. You would think that it would be, but it seems they used the least amount of their budget on her character. Every character is beautiful, except for that one. It seems (to me anyway) that they tried way too hard to make the demon look EXACTLY like Ms. Jolie, and forgot that it is supposed to be a DEMON. I think the dudes doing the animation were just way too happy with animating Angelina Jolie that they forgot what they were trying to accomplish. It shows. The movie gets great again after that, however, and it is worth seeing. Only in 3D, though. If you can't see it in 3D, then don't bother. Go see "No Country For Old Men".

Saw this in Real3D over the weekend. The first few minutes, the 3D actually got in the way a little. Hard to describe, but it was "shaky" to some extent. I saw "Meet The Robinsons" at the same theatre, so I don't know if there was a technical issue with the equipment or something in the movie. After Grendel made his first appearance, things were rock steady to the point I ceased to think of this as an "animated" film. The last 3rd of the movie was outstanding, especially the battle with the dragon. However, my son and I were absolutely pissed at the ending.
***SPOILER WARNING***
Wiglaf should have either thrown the dragon cup into the burning funeral boat OR just shattered it and said "no more, demon bitch!" And, the Austin Powers moments were just stupid. Go for the "R" and show Beowulf's johnson or skip the AP stuff altogether....it was silly and takes you right out of the serious scene about to happen.

SEE IT! It is absolutely the dog's bollocks!
Blew my mind. And see it in IMAX 3D, if only for the experience.
<br>
Interestingly enough, it is totally justifyable having the CG characters look like their real life 'Users', because it puts the same 'actors' in a world where it would we could totally have our belief suspended but with recognizable faces. And you enjoy it. You have to see Anthony Hopkins prancing about in the nude to understand what I mean. If it didn't look so much like him, the scene would not have been half as poignant and hilarious.
<br>
See this movie man, I'm telling you. DOn't let this experience in IMAX exist and you not see it. I was literally dodging out of the wa of the screen, and so was the rest of the audience. NUTS!!

I joined tonight just to bitch about this nightmare of a movie!!! i hated it more than the Lindsay Lohan stripper movie. I'd rather watch Andy Warhol's Empire on a loop for twenty-four hours while someone with Taco Bell breath kissed my neck!!! it was a total bore-snoozer and i'm offeneded that EVERYONE in America didn't rush the projection booth and eat the film so it would never grace the screen again. total horseshit, i'd rather watch a pile of dirty diapers decompose in the bright Texas sun!!! i'm so pissed and annoyed, i'm going to go vomit until the toilet seat hits me on the head. maybe i'll fall down the stairs and lose my memory!! i'd gladly take that fate if it meant never having a memory of BEOWULF again. don't get me wrong, WHAT LIES BENEATH was great, kudos to Amber Valletta and her costars... please please please DO NOT SEE THIS MOVIE and pretend you didn't want to blind yourself with your slushy!!!!!!!! BEOWULF is a massive FAILURE on a huge level. eveyone involved smells like MOBY DICK'S ASS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i'll fight anyone in the streets who liked this piece of grody-ass barf!!!!!!!!!!!!! i just barfed in my mouth thinking about it again!!!!!! kiss it BEOWULF!

One reviewer compared it to watching Gladiator with Shrek as lead character. Another reviewer (who sort of liked it) commented on the cliffs and mountains in the movie, where in fact Denmark (where this story supposedly takes place) is about the flattest place on earth. I dunno. Might still go watch it.
vH pH

Saw this last night. Beowolf the screenplay is a load of cobblers. They have taken the story, gutted it for the sake of the spectacle. which is spectacular and the movie looks great. but the acting is just dire. Jolie or jolie bot delux has ceased for sometime to look like a normal human being and she if didnt exist there woul be a need for a computer company to create her. also can you tell the difference between a digitised Robin wright Penn and the real thing. I knew she was in the movie but christ I found it very hard to tell the difference. I understand the concept of artistic liberties, but I doubt the original writer wrote all those cetunries ago You weasly bastard and the word bollox. Malkovich was channelling olivier, grendel looked he was model on stephen Hawking. This movie was given a 12 a cert in Ireland. Which I believe was very inapropriate given the amount of nudity, Blood letting. even though I havent 300. I am already getting sick of THIIS IS SPARTAAAAAAAAAAAAA style dialouge which filmakers are now stuffing into war movies. you wouldnt expect John Rambo after slaughtering an entire village to shout loudly I AM JOHN RAAAAAAAAAAAAMBO. So enough of the loud name calling. What was with the abrupt ending of the movie. The scenes in the queens cave were beautiful. This technology needs works. Shouting the characters name over and over is not acting. Didnt work in mystic river in 300 and it doesnt work here.

I enjoyed the movie, but found the 'lego' style horses inexcusable, the faces of the people were creepy because however 'real' they look when not moving, when they speak, they look terrible. Its just not quite right yet.
I also DO NOT KNOW WHY they have to change the story??!!! The original beowulf story (which is easy to find online), is a great one, and they had to go and change this for whatever reason. HOW can you take such a fantastic and brilliant story and think you can a) either improve on it and b) not do it with real visceral actors.
13th warrior is a better interpretation of beowulf to me than this.
Still, all that said - it was great fun and I enjoyed the dragon fight (i didnt see this in 3D), but the whole way through was wishing it was live action.

seriously, it's a naked angelina jolie. I don't blame either kings for screwing her. sorry but if a naked angelina wants to get boned by me and give me gold and glory that would be a no-brainer. I would make frequent visits. I don't care if she is a demon as long as she turns into angelina jolie I'll keep making the same mistake too. damn she is hot. to tame brad pitt and make him a multiple child raiser she must have a pussy of gold.

After I watched the 3D version, I snuck into the theater across the hall and watched the last 30 min of the non-3D movie...different film..not nearly as powerful and immersive. I was totally unfamiliar with the classic Beowulf story, so maybe that's part of why the story worked fine for me, but the 3D rocked...I may go see this again in the theater even.

But no can do - closest one is about 5hrs away.
I agree Rupee88 that it doesn't matter if the story is authentic to the original (which i think is better personally and has nothing to do with beowulf fucking demons and Hrothgar certainly is NOT the father of Grendel),
BUT - the irritating thing about new versions of old and great stories - is that now anyone who doesn't knwo the story, will think this IS the story. And the original is a work of art.

and won me pver. Still not sold on the all mocap aspect. The digital work was brilliant on the landscapes and the monsters who were also served well by the mocap. But with the humans was still a little distracting, though far better than in previous photorealistic CGIs, but I still like real actors better.
That said the story, intruige, themes of ambition and corruption and the development of Beowulf character captured me to the extent I forgot about the CG faces and just got lost I the world of myth. And maybe some of the unrealness of the look made the mental transition to the world of myth that much easier, like the background in 300.
Anyway loved the script, reminds me of his reimagining of Snow White in short story form, I think it was called Snow Glass Apples, that would make an awesome short film.

"Instead at this point – the film has become a tale told again and again for over 13 centuries"
I don't know what you base this comment on, but what you describe has precious little to do with the tale "told again and again for over 13 centuries" but rather has something to do with another attempt on "improving" on historical texts by somehow tacking modern tropes on them.